There are 51 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Peyton coming?

Originally posted by elguapo:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by elguapo:
Brooks will never be franchised do you know how much he would get? Brooks is good and not a pro bowler like Rogers. We can get a olb that can do half of what brooks can do which is about 3-4 sacks but replacing Rogers at cb will be very hard. Hopefully we sign both but we are so stacked at lb that one will have to go soon especially if bowman needs to be extended in the near future

This right here shows your ignorance. Brooks would be franchised LESS than Rogers...and it's Rogers for the record (not Rodgers). And yes, Brooks was an alternate pro-bowler. Yes, he's a pro-bowler and I challenge you to find a better, more complete SAM in the league. On the flip side, you can find more CB's out there. If we were running a cover 2, Rogers would be more valuable...but since we're running a 3-4, your front 7 is more valuable. The age thing is huge too. Rogers would be 34, 35 at how much? Rogers can play essentially one position...he covers one guy. Brooks can play LDE/RDE, SAM/WILL and TED and on ST's. We have promising young guys in Culliver/Brock and we'll probably go after another cheap veteran FA CB out that which are easier to find over a SAM which are practically non-existent. And honesty, for those who think, or who would even want, Aldon Smith to play SAM, you have no idea what you're asking. Starting A.Smith, even at WILL (and) Haralson every down would be a major drop off in production - teams would have no issues attacking the edges, doubling Aldon and both would wear down as the season progressed. It would be very hard to find a rookie pass rush specialist that wouldn't telegraph our pass rush and still be effective enough to take the doubles away from Aldon.

We also need to consider that Brooks played over McDonald all year and he was either hurt, ineffective or not 100% a good portion of the year and Brooks STILL had 8 sacks, 3rd in QB pressures/hit and tops in tackles for loss and 6th in team tackles...nobody even bothered trying to run to his side hence the big emphasis on utilizing Haralson on 1st and 2nd downs and Aldon as a 3rd down specialist most of the year.

This proves your ignorance. An alternate IS NOT A PRO BOWLER......sorry about that one. And I've been spelling his name Rogers not Rodgers. Are you smoking anything by any chance? Can I have some please. There are quite a few SAM backers in the league that are better. It's ridiculous that you think he is the most complete one in the league. that has got to be one of the dumbest statements I have heard so far about a member of our team. I challenge you to find one expert or analyst to state brooks is the most complete Sam in the league. You won't bc you are wrong. He isn't even a top 5 and a stretch to call him a top 10. If the niners FO felt the same way you did we would already lock him up bc he is the MOST COMPLETE SAM. Wow. You really love this guy, so much so you are blinded. I hope we keep him but Rogers is more valuable than brooks.

Eh Brooks is pretty good, he's better than any other OLB on the market in this class of free agents but yeah Rogers is better and more important to our defense. Brooks is replaceable IMO because you can get a rookie OLB/DE like a Jake Bequette or Cam Johnson in the 3rd round to come in and rush the passer on 3rd downs, and on first and 2nd you can just place Haralson and Aldon at the 2 OLB spots. Plus there is always someone who gets cut that's a Jason Taylor type player that you can have come in as a vet and they may not be able to play all the downs but they can give you some good snaps. We can't find anyone to come in and alternate covering the other team's best reciever and the slot reciever 1 on 1 like Rogers did, and also get 6 INTS. That is a friggin super star season right there. Rogers and Goldson are really important to keep around. Brooks is a little bit less so. Would like him back but he's replaceable. So for the most part I agree with el guapo.
Originally posted by mike:
When did he say that? Link? I'm betting if he said anything it's that he enjoyed playing for this defense and would love to play here next year. Rarely do they use terms like "discount", their agent would kill them.

He's going to want to cash out on a solid season whether with us or someone else.

Well then, you would lose that bet.

Q: Would you take a hometown discount to stay?

ROGERS: Hometown discount? I would take a team discount. Hometown discount – I think that's real low (laughs). But just consider the team first. I definitely will. Like I told them, I like this from the owner to the general manager to everybody that's in this organization. I like everything about this organization – all the players, the trainers. This ain't about me coming out and saying, 'Now I'm free, let's get the check.' I'm thinking about this team, and this is where I want to be.
http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/163732-keep-rogers-or-brooks/page5/#post70
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by HessianDud:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by sfout:
Originally posted by Fal_Mc11:
Originally posted by lamontb:
This really is a tough one. Younger pass rusher vs aging corner back. A corner back that had a career year playing behind a dominate front 7. He had 6 interceptions this year vs 8 in his whole career. Then Brooks has had questions about wok ethic at times. But every year the guy has improved. Probably will be a 9 sack guy his whole career. But that's exactly what you need when you have the Smith Bros. wrecking havoc. To me Brooks has a better chance of maintaining his current level of play for far longer than Rogers. I'm slightly leaning towards Brooks. I think it will come down to how well the staff thinks Aldon projects as starter at OLB vs how they project Culliver ar a starter.(1)

Brooks is young and has improved every year since joining the team. Plus we have worked so hard on building a pass rush the last few years, are we ready to take a step back in that department? Mario Williams will be the top OLB for the 3-4 on the market, but Brooks will be up there to due to this age and skill level. Does he want big money? If so the Cowgirls, can write the HUGE check that will make it hard for him to return.(2)

Clearly I want Brooks over Rogers. See Rogers is and was great last year, but part of that was the product of a great pass rush. A pass rush provided by Brooks and the Smiths. If Brooks leaves, that would leave us who to replace him? Don't out price yourself Brooks, stay loyal to the team that took you off waivers and believed in you.

1. Culliver looked great and statistically he measures right up to Rogers. As a nickel and occasional #2 Cully logged 40% the amount of snaps that Rogers played and he logged 7 PDs while Rogers logged 18. Ironically 7 is 40% of 18 so you extrapolate Cully's production out to a similar level as Rogers. Cully also registered 35 tackles while Rogers registered 44. IMO I think Cully could step right in for Rogers and we'd have minimal drop off, the only issue is Cully isn't nimble enough to cover slot receivers in the nickel like Rogers is, unless Brock or T. Brown is skilled enough to defend against slot receivers we'd have to find a new CB capable of covering the slot.

Thats the real question: Can Cully cover slot receivers in the nickel and completely take over for Rogers or will we have to find a new slot corner when we go to nickel packages? Will Brown be able to move inside on the slot with Brock coming in as the nickel on the outside?

2.With Jerry's comments about wanting our ILBs I bet he wouldn't mind snatching up a quality OLB from us lol. Someone said MM tweeted that Brooks is looking for $8M a year average, is he really worth that much to us? IMO Aldon will be able to take over for him next year and we either draft a new pass rush specialist OLB or use Demarcus Dobbs as a pass rush DE on 3rd down.

Letting Brooks walk seems like it will cause the least amount of headaches especially if he is demanding some ridiculous salary.
Good points. But it's not like Rogers locked down the slot. He's still trying to figure out which way Victor Cruz is going. Niners had to double cover the slot in the 2nd half of the game.

And Dobbs isn't going to be a pass rush specialist on 3rd downs. That's still going to be Aldon's job in the 4 man front.

Now that 8 million a year for Brooks might be the ultimate deal breaker. Do you or anybody have a clue what the going rate is for a 8-10 sack OLB is in the NFL?

cool, an actual conversation.

I think Rogers will be more willing to come back at a price that we like. but i think its fair to consider if Rogers great season was an anomaly, or the result of playing behind a great front 7. Of course you could argue that Brooks had a really good year in his contract year, too, and that could be a "buyer beware" situation.

I think its also important to consider that the team does project Cully as a starter long-term. Haralson is not the long-term answer at OLB, as fine a player as he is.
I think their is a lot of negotiating going on right now. Reports are Rogers wants a long term deal and a nice sized contract. But is willing to work on something with the Niners, but would field other offers. Next thing you know we hear how high the team is on Culliver coming in to replace him. Barrows tweets Brooks could be looking for 8 million a year. And today Baalke states that Aldon will be a every down player next year. Baalke wants to create a situation where it doesn't look like the player has all the leverage. Real or just perception I'm liking the way he works.

We very well could be looking at Rogers and Brooks walking.

Also the same thing could be said about Rogers in terms being a one year wonder. Though I've though he's always been a solid corner he only had 8 career interceptions before this year in which he had 6.

Man I really didn't think a year ago that our main problem would be retaining so many guys that really had excellent years.


I think they both walk. Baalke will take some heat for it of course, but he has built up a reputation that would buffer fan frustration.
His policy is to NOT overpay. Paying Brooks 8 million or Rogers similar, would be overpaying. That is not his policy.

Someone will pay for Brooks for sure. I don't know if someone will pay as huge for Rogers at his age. We have a chance to keep him, but he will have to drastically lower his demands.
Originally posted by BrianGO:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by HessianDud:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by sfout:
Originally posted by Fal_Mc11:
Originally posted by lamontb:
This really is a tough one. Younger pass rusher vs aging corner back. A corner back that had a career year playing behind a dominate front 7. He had 6 interceptions this year vs 8 in his whole career. Then Brooks has had questions about wok ethic at times. But every year the guy has improved. Probably will be a 9 sack guy his whole career. But that's exactly what you need when you have the Smith Bros. wrecking havoc. To me Brooks has a better chance of maintaining his current level of play for far longer than Rogers. I'm slightly leaning towards Brooks. I think it will come down to how well the staff thinks Aldon projects as starter at OLB vs how they project Culliver ar a starter.(1)

Brooks is young and has improved every year since joining the team. Plus we have worked so hard on building a pass rush the last few years, are we ready to take a step back in that department? Mario Williams will be the top OLB for the 3-4 on the market, but Brooks will be up there to due to this age and skill level. Does he want big money? If so the Cowgirls, can write the HUGE check that will make it hard for him to return.(2)

Clearly I want Brooks over Rogers. See Rogers is and was great last year, but part of that was the product of a great pass rush. A pass rush provided by Brooks and the Smiths. If Brooks leaves, that would leave us who to replace him? Don't out price yourself Brooks, stay loyal to the team that took you off waivers and believed in you.

1. Culliver looked great and statistically he measures right up to Rogers. As a nickel and occasional #2 Cully logged 40% the amount of snaps that Rogers played and he logged 7 PDs while Rogers logged 18. Ironically 7 is 40% of 18 so you extrapolate Cully's production out to a similar level as Rogers. Cully also registered 35 tackles while Rogers registered 44. IMO I think Cully could step right in for Rogers and we'd have minimal drop off, the only issue is Cully isn't nimble enough to cover slot receivers in the nickel like Rogers is, unless Brock or T. Brown is skilled enough to defend against slot receivers we'd have to find a new CB capable of covering the slot.

Thats the real question: Can Cully cover slot receivers in the nickel and completely take over for Rogers or will we have to find a new slot corner when we go to nickel packages? Will Brown be able to move inside on the slot with Brock coming in as the nickel on the outside?

2.With Jerry's comments about wanting our ILBs I bet he wouldn't mind snatching up a quality OLB from us lol. Someone said MM tweeted that Brooks is looking for $8M a year average, is he really worth that much to us? IMO Aldon will be able to take over for him next year and we either draft a new pass rush specialist OLB or use Demarcus Dobbs as a pass rush DE on 3rd down.

Letting Brooks walk seems like it will cause the least amount of headaches especially if he is demanding some ridiculous salary.
Good points. But it's not like Rogers locked down the slot. He's still trying to figure out which way Victor Cruz is going. Niners had to double cover the slot in the 2nd half of the game.

And Dobbs isn't going to be a pass rush specialist on 3rd downs. That's still going to be Aldon's job in the 4 man front.

Now that 8 million a year for Brooks might be the ultimate deal breaker. Do you or anybody have a clue what the going rate is for a 8-10 sack OLB is in the NFL?

cool, an actual conversation.

I think Rogers will be more willing to come back at a price that we like. but i think its fair to consider if Rogers great season was an anomaly, or the result of playing behind a great front 7. Of course you could argue that Brooks had a really good year in his contract year, too, and that could be a "buyer beware" situation.

I think its also important to consider that the team does project Cully as a starter long-term. Haralson is not the long-term answer at OLB, as fine a player as he is.
I think their is a lot of negotiating going on right now. Reports are Rogers wants a long term deal and a nice sized contract. But is willing to work on something with the Niners, but would field other offers. Next thing you know we hear how high the team is on Culliver coming in to replace him. Barrows tweets Brooks could be looking for 8 million a year. And today Baalke states that Aldon will be a every down player next year. Baalke wants to create a situation where it doesn't look like the player has all the leverage. Real or just perception I'm liking the way he works.

We very well could be looking at Rogers and Brooks walking.

Also the same thing could be said about Rogers in terms being a one year wonder. Though I've though he's always been a solid corner he only had 8 career interceptions before this year in which he had 6.

Man I really didn't think a year ago that our main problem would be retaining so many guys that really had excellent years.


I think they both walk. Baalke will take some heat for it of course, but he has built up a reputation that would buffer fan frustration.
His policy is to NOT overpay. Paying Brooks 8 million or Rogers similar, would be overpaying. That is not his policy.

Someone will pay for Brooks for sure. I don't know if someone will pay as huge for Rogers at his age. We have a chance to keep him, but he will have to drastically lower his demands.

So then the only guys we resign are Goldson and Alex and maybe Ginn/Snyder? We would have like 18-24 mill in cap room. As a fan I would be pretty furious if that got left on the table. I'm not asking to go out and sign Vincent Jackson and Colston at the same time and then sign Mario Williams or anything ridiculous like that, but I'll just say that if he we kind of let the defense break up and don't have a reason/plan to immediate replace those guys or improve another part of the team I will be pissed.
Originally posted by WillistheWall:
So then the only guys we resign are Goldson and Alex and maybe Ginn/Snyder? We would have like 18-24 mill in cap room. As a fan I would be pretty furious if that got left on the table. I'm not asking to go out and sign Vincent Jackson and Colston at the same time and then sign Mario Williams or anything ridiculous like that, but I'll just say that if he we kind of let the defense break up and don't have a reason/plan to immediate replace those guys or improve another part of the team I will be pissed.


Its tough. But when you look at the salary cap and the situation, its probably better to replace them with free agents / draft picks.
I actually think Brooks is WORTH 8 million a year; but only to a team that doesn't already have a top OLB. We have Aldon, so its tough to justify paying big money to both OLB positions. Also, Aldon's agent might demand him to sit unless he makes at least as much money as Brooks, especially if he produces the same or better as he did his rookie year.
Rogers is a very good player, but more like a better Walt Harris type; a player who makes plays because of his veteran savvy. I don't think we should pay him like an "elite" cornerback because he had one year of great play behind the NFL's best front seven.

People forget how we obtained Rogers and Brooks in the first place. We got both of them from the "bargain basement bin" of NFL free agency. That strategy has been working for us.
It's not an easy decision either way, but IMO, if Baalke remains steadfast to his strategy, then I don't see how he can justify committing big money to these players.
Originally posted by BrianGO:
Originally posted by WillistheWall:
So then the only guys we resign are Goldson and Alex and maybe Ginn/Snyder? We would have like 18-24 mill in cap room. As a fan I would be pretty furious if that got left on the table. I'm not asking to go out and sign Vincent Jackson and Colston at the same time and then sign Mario Williams or anything ridiculous like that, but I'll just say that if he we kind of let the defense break up and don't have a reason/plan to immediate replace those guys or improve another part of the team I will be pissed.


Its tough. But when you look at the salary cap and the situation, its probably better to replace them with free agents / draft picks.
I actually think Brooks is WORTH 8 million a year; but only to a team that doesn't already have a top OLB. We have Aldon, so its tough to justify paying big money to both OLB positions. Also, Aldon's agent might demand him to sit unless he makes at least as much money as Brooks, especially if he produces the same or better as he did his rookie year.
Rogers is a very good player, but more like a better Walt Harris type; a player who makes plays because of his veteran savvy. I don't think we should pay him like an "elite" cornerback because he had one year of great play behind the NFL's best front seven.

People forget how we obtained Rogers and Brooks in the first place. We got both of them from the "bargain basement bin" of NFL free agency. That strategy has been working for us.
It's not an easy decision either way, but IMO, if Baalke remains steadfast to his strategy, then I don't see how he can justify committing big money to these players.

I can tolerate letting Brooks go. He is a good player but Bowman will be coming up for an extension in a year or 2 and Aldon is going to be here a long time most likely, making big money. Tying that much money up in the LB corp would be difficult. It's like when the Ravens had to let go of Bart Scott. But to let go of Rogers would be tough for me. It has literally been over a decade IMO since we had CB play that good. After the years of Clements it was nice to see someone actually stick to their WR most of the time. He had some game changing INTs for us as well. I mean if you look at the season he put together-6 picks, 20 PDs, rarely burned by a WR, he played like a superstar. That was like prime Charles Woodson. His height of 6'1'' matches up against the other teams #1s real well and he can handle the slot 1v1. Not too many guys can do that. He was always a good Cover corner in Washington, just struggled to make the interceptions. I know he'll be 31 next season but he doesn't have too much mileage on him and he might be irreplaceable IMO. If we let him go I'd definitely be upset if we don't draft a CB in the first and/or sign one of the younger CBs(like a Carr or Grimes).
Originally posted by WillistheWall:
I can tolerate letting Brooks go. He is a good player but Bowman will be coming up for an extension in a year or 2 and Aldon is going to be here a long time most likely, making big money. Tying that much money up in the LB corp would be difficult. It's like when the Ravens had to let go of Bart Scott. But to let go of Rogers would be tough for me. It has literally been over a decade IMO since we had CB play that good. After the years of Clements it was nice to see someone actually stick to their WR most of the time. He had some game changing INTs for us as well. I mean if you look at the season he put together-6 picks, 20 PDs, rarely burned by a WR, he played like a superstar. That was like prime Charles Woodson. His height of 6'1'' matches up against the other teams #1s real well and he can handle the slot 1v1. Not too many guys can do that. He was always a good Cover corner in Washington, just struggled to make the interceptions. I know he'll be 31 next season but he doesn't have too much mileage on him and he might be irreplaceable IMO. If we let him go I'd definitely be upset if we don't draft a CB in the first and/or sign one of the younger CBs(like a Carr or Grimes).

So so true. The niners haven't had a good to great cb in I would say close to 15 years. We finally have one. The niners can replace brooks, not too easily but there are players that are almost as good that are available in fa, or even a rookie MIT be half as good. I would say haralson is as good vs the run and half as good vs the pass. So we will be ok to let brooks walk but unless we get cortland from the titans then we won't be able to replace rogers
Originally posted by D_Niner:
Brooks can easily be replaced. A pro-bowl CB can't.


disagree, this is Rogers first great year and he is 30, we only had 3 OLBs on the team last year and Brooks does it all.
He can pass rush and tackle. People keep saying Aldon will replace Brooks, thats not true Aldon plays ROLB and brooks plays LOLB.
ALdon is much more effective coming behind Justin Smith
I'm confident we can keep both

But Brooks brings a lot to our defense, he can be quiet the workload for tackles and guards to deal with, he has great size and can handle the pounding of 4 quarters, plus he can be a nasty pass rusher and is very strong against the run , IMO we wont be able to make an upgrade at his position right away if we let him walk, plus he has at least 4 more years of NFL Starter quality football left in him

Lock em both up Trent
I'm not too sure on Rogers. signed a 1 yr deal. Played his best ever. He is 31 i think so he doesn't have to much upside. Hmmmmmm He's going to get a lot of money come FA & i don't think we can match or afford him. If we can get him at a good deal then yes. But the Routt signing i think made resigning Rogers a little harder.
I say keep brooks bcause I.feel the front 7 is more important than the back 4. OLB is much harder to find, we have a nice stable of corners although I wonder if cully can cover the slot as well as rodgers. Acually I think baalke will find a way to keep both bcause he's not gonna pay a huge price for f.a. Wr remember this is a wc offense we really dont need a #1 receiver we just good receivers for example garcon,fleener and stephen hill along with crabs morgan davis walker. Think about it
I say Sign Brooks
I am really hopeful that both these guys want to stay in SF bad enough to give the niners a "hometown discount". Neither player did squat before coming to the niners and I would say that they both owe the niners for cranking up there careers.
Originally posted by elguapo:
This proves your ignorance. An alternate IS NOT A PRO BOWLER......sorry about that one. And I've been spelling his name Rogers not Rodgers. Are you smoking anything by any chance? Can I have some please. There are quite a few SAM backers in the league that are better. It's ridiculous that you think he is the most complete one in the league. that has got to be one of the dumbest statements I have heard so far about a member of our team. I challenge you to find one expert or analyst to state brooks is the most complete Sam in the league. You won't bc you are wrong. He isn't even a top 5 and a stretch to call him a top 10. If the niners FO felt the same way you did we would already lock him up bc he is the MOST COMPLETE SAM. Wow. You really love this guy, so much so you are blinded. I hope we keep him but Rogers is more valuable than brooks.

LOL. Do you really want to get into the semantics of an alternate pro-bowler vs. pro-bowler? The bigger issue is that how many SAM's can go to the pro-bowl at one time? And even bigger, obviously the rest of the entire league recognize his value along with many other 49er "alternate" pro-bowlers. It puts him in the top 3 to 5 best SAM's in the game in his first year as a starter; why don't our own fans realize this? And still, I challenge you to find a better SAM today: "There are quite a few SAM backers in the league that are better"...who put up better all-around numbers, production and demonstrated a complete game.

I'm not IN LOVE with Brooks but for a 3-4 defense, you are always looking for the best 4 LBers you can get. And for those who ask how long it's been since we had a good corner? Walt Harris? How long has it been since we had the best four-LB 3-4 combination in the game (as we currently stand)? Never? If you can keep this front 7 together, you have a chance to be one of the best front 7's in history in line with the Saints, Giants, 9ers of the 80/90's, etc. In it's first year, this front 7 (not the back end) set NFL records. Imagine year 2 and 3 together if Brooks and Aldon are starters and Fangio can start opening up the playbook and moving Brooks over to WILL and rush from the blind side while Aldon rushes from the TED spot inside while Bowman lines up outside; Willis rushes off Aldon or Brooks. Get the idea?

My solution was simple. If Brooks wants a high deal, you Franchise him at 6+ million, sign Rogers and put the onus back on Goldson at the original price of 5 for 25 (with the added pressure Whitner is putting on him to sign and stay together). We should have no problems signing the rest AND have plenty of money left over for a WR. FS are easier to find in FA and the draft than a SAM or CB not to mention, if you keep your front 7 together AND sign Carlos, there won't be much pressure on the FS who comes in.

And for those who still think Aldon is going to suddenly start at the SAM position if Brooks walks, please see post #65. A rookie solution is another not-so-good idea. The 3-4 is like the WCO. First you have to have all the right pieces and THEN it takes a good 3 years to learn/master. Brooks has been developing in the 3-4 for many years now. Aldon still has a LONG ways to go but as a rookie, he was primarily asked to rush the passer from the weak (blind) side on third downs WHILE he studied and learned the playbook. Now with a full year of exposure to the playbook, playing the WILL spot and a full off-season, Baalke thinks he's ready to start at WILL (most likely). But it will still take him another year or two to master both the WILL/SAM spots (b/c ideally, they are interchangeable once mastered - as we see with the Ravens/Steelers). But for now...for 2012..stay tuned.

PS: Rogers is referred to as "Rodgers" throughout this thread...wasn't calling you out in particular.
[ Edited by NCommand on Feb 24, 2012 at 9:07 AM ]
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by elguapo:
This proves your ignorance. An alternate IS NOT A PRO BOWLER......sorry about that one. And I've been spelling his name Rogers not Rodgers. Are you smoking anything by any chance? Can I have some please. There are quite a few SAM backers in the league that are better. It's ridiculous that you think he is the most complete one in the league. that has got to be one of the dumbest statements I have heard so far about a member of our team. I challenge you to find one expert or analyst to state brooks is the most complete Sam in the league. You won't bc you are wrong. He isn't even a top 5 and a stretch to call him a top 10. If the niners FO felt the same way you did we would already lock him up bc he is the MOST COMPLETE SAM. Wow. You really love this guy, so much so you are blinded. I hope we keep him but Rogers is more valuable than brooks.

LOL. Do you really want to get into the semantics of an alternate pro-bowler vs. pro-bowler? The bigger issue is that how many SAM's can go to the pro-bowl at one time? And even bigger, obviously the rest of the entire league recognize his value along with many other 49er "alternate" pro-bowlers. It puts him in the top 3 to 5 best SAM's in the game in his first year as a starter; why don't our own fans realize this? And still, I challenge you to find a better SAM today: "There are quite a few SAM backers in the league that are better"...who put up better all-around numbers, production and demonstrated a complete game.

I'm not IN LOVE with Brooks but for a 3-4 defense, you are always looking for the best 4 LBers you can get. And for those who ask how long it's been since we had a good corner? Walt Harris? How long has it been since we had the best four-LB 3-4 combination in the game (as we currently stand)? Never? If you can keep this front 7 together, you have a chance to be one of the best front 7's in history in line with the Saints, Giants, 9ers of the 80/90's, etc. In it's first year, this front 7 (not the back end) set NFL records. Imagine year 2 and 3 together if Brooks and Aldon are starters and Fangio can start opening up the playbook and moving Brooks over to WILL and rush from the blind side while Aldon rushes from the TED spot inside while Bowman lines up outside; Willis rushes off Aldon or Brooks. Get the idea?

My solution was simple. If Brooks wants a high deal, you Franchise him at 6+ million, sign Rogers and put the onus back on Goldson at the original price of 5 for 25 (with the added pressure Whitner is putting on him to sign and stay together). We should have no problems signing the rest AND have plenty of money left over for a WR. FS are easier to find in FA and the draft than a SAM or CB not to mention, if you keep your front 7 together AND sign Carlos, there won't be much pressure on the FS who comes in.

And for those who still think Aldon is going to suddenly start at the SAM position if Brooks walks, please see post #65. A rookie solution is another not-so-good idea. The 3-4 is like the WCO. First you have to have all the right pieces and THEN it takes a good 3 years to learn/master. Brooks has been developing in the 3-4 for many years now. Aldon still has a LONG ways to go but as a rookie, he was primarily asked to rush the passer from the weak (blind) side on third downs WHILE he studied and learned the playbook. Now with a full year of exposure to the playbook, playing the WILL spot and a full off-season, Baalke thinks he's ready to start at WILL (most likely). But it will still take him another year or two to master both the WILL/SAM spots (b/c ideally, they are interchangeable once mastered - as we see with the Ravens/Steelers). But for now...for 2012..stay tuned.

PS: Rogers is referred to as "Rodgers" throughout this thread...wasn't calling you out in particular.
s**t i never even thought about that. I like that idea.